Rajasthan High Court
Shri Janwari Lal S/O Shri ... vs Shri Mangalsingh S/O Shri Kailash ... on 2 March, 2022
Bench: Prakash Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2809/2019
1. Shri Janwari Lal S/o Shri Moolchand Ji, Aged About 56
Years,
2. Smt. Sugriya @ Sugni Devi W/o Shri Janwari Lal, Aged
About 53 Years,
3. Vidhya Devi @ Bidami Devi W/o Moolchand Ji, Aged About
84 Years,
All R/o Naiyo Ka Mohalla, Pipliya Kalan District Pali (Raj.)
At Present R/o Sendra Road Beawar District Ajmer.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Shri Mangalsingh S/o Shri Kailash Chand, (Driver Of
Trailer No. R.J.01 - G A 3662
2. Shri Charansingh Paroda S/o Shri Durga Lal Paroda, R/o
Village and Post Saradhna District Ajmer (Raj.) Owner Of
Registered Trailer No. R.J.01- G.A. 3662
3. S.B.I General Insurance Company Ltd., Registered and
Corporate Office 'Natraj' 101, 201 and 301 Junction Of
Western High Way and Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri
(East) Mumbai 400069 Branch Office - First Floor 9
Dwarka Niwas, Kailashpuri Tonk Road Jaipur (Raj.)
302018 Insurance Company Of Trailer No. R.J.01 R A
3662 Insurance Policy Number Valid for dated 21.03.2014
To 21.03.2015.
4. Shri Narayan Kathat S/o Shri Sardara Kathat, R/o 2
School Ke Pass Village Kaliyawas Post Bayla Tehsil Beawar
District Ajmer (Raj.) Registered Owner Tampu No.R.J.36 R
A 2487
5. The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, Branch Office -
Ajmeri Gate Ke Andar Beawar District Ajmer (Raj.)
Insurance Company Tampu No. R.J. 36 G A 2487
Insurance Company No.242103/31/2014/9393 Insurance
Dated 17.01.2014 To Dated 16.01.2015
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amit Jindal, Advocate
(2 of 4) [CMA-2809/2019]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
Judgment
02/03/2022
This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellants-
claimants (for short, 'the claimants') against the judgment dated
11.2.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar
(for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the
claim petition filed by the claimants.
Facts of the case are that the claimants filed a claim
petition before the Tribunal, wherein it was averred that on
18.5.2014 deceased Suresh Kumar Bhati was returning from
Laadpura to Beawar with Tempo No. RJ 36 GA 2487 after
unloading the canteen's goods in Laadpura. In the said Tempo,
labours Jitendra @ Munna and Nauratmal Luhar R/o Peepliya Kalan
were also sitting. On Ajmer Beawar road, repairing work was
going on therefore, one side of the six lane road was blocked and
flow of vehicles was stopped. Due to this, driver Suresh Kumar
Bhati was driving the Tempo on his left side on six lane of NH 8
from Beawar to Ajmer carefully and with normal speed. It was
also pleaded that above Kesarpura Bridge at about 5.30 PM, the
driver of Trailer No. RJ 01 GA 3662 was driving it rashly and
negligently on the wrong side of road and he hit the Tempo going
at its right side, because of which Tempo got damaged and Tempo
Driver Suresh and the labourers Jitendra @ Munna and Nauratmal
Luhar sitting inside the Tempo died and Trailer driver fled from the
spot. Subsequently, FIR No. 91/2014 was lodged at Police Station
Mangliyawas for the offence under Sections 279 and 304A IPC and
(3 of 4) [CMA-2809/2019]
Sections 134/187 IPC. After investigation, the police submitted the
negative final report.
The claimants filed a claim petition before the Tribunal
claiming compensation due to the death of Nauratmal, which came
to be dismissed by the Tribunal vide its judgment dated
11.2.2019. Hence, this Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed.
Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the
deceased Nauratmal was sitting in the Tempo. He further submits
that repairing work was going on, therefore, one side of six lane
road was closed and all the traffic was diverted on the other side.
However, the learned Tribunal has utterly failed to consider this
aspect of the matter and dismissed the claim petition in a
mechanical manner. On this count, the impugned judgment is
liable to be quashed and set-aside.
Heard. Considered.
From a perusal of the material on record, it transpires
that AW-1 Smt. Beena Devi admitted in her cross-examination
that Trailer was coming in its right side. AW-2 Smt. Sugiya also
admitted this fact in her cross-examination that Trailer was
coming in its right side.
AW-3 Preetam Singh in his evidence stated that Trailer
driver drove the Trailer rashly and negligently and hit the Tempo
plying on its side, whereas in the FIR lodged by him, he
mentioned that Trailer driver drove the trailer in wrong side and
hit the tempo plying on its right side. Thus, there are material
contradictions in the evidence of PW-3 Preetam Singh and the
same is unreliable and untrustworthy, moreso in the view of the
fact that he is the real brother of the deceased Jitendra @ Munna
and is an interested witness. On the FIR lodged by PW-3 Preetam
(4 of 4) [CMA-2809/2019]
Singh, the police conducted the investigation and having found the
negligence of Tempo driver Suresh Kumar, submitted the negative
final report, but no protest petition was filed by the claimants
against submission of negative final report. By clinching and
positive evidence, the claimants failed to establish that the
negligence was on the part of the Trailer Driver and on six lane
road repairing work was going on. In this view of the matter, the
Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that the accident did not
occur due to the negligence of Trailer driver.
Having considered the entire material on record, the
Tribunal has rightly dismissed the claim petition filed by the
claimants. The findings arrived at by the Tribunal are just and
proper, with which I fully concur.
For the aforesaid reasons, I find no force in this appeal
and the same being bereft of any merit, is liable to be dismissed,
which stands dismissed accordingly.
(PRAKASH GUPTA),J
Dk/21
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
